Author
Topic: Panasonic 60x superzoom (Read 7594 times)

I like how they describe it as a cannon. It's not, although for those used to the prosumer market it seems like it. They should see a 600mm, or even one of those rare 1200mm lenses =D

I'd be curious to see what a modern-day EF 1200mm f/5.6 L IS II lens looked like, and what kind of IQ it provided. I suspect it might barely border on "hand holdable" (i.e. like the old 600mm f/4 L) if it used todays fluorite elements and titanium/magalloy body. The 600mm f/4 L IS II with a 2x TC still offers STUNNING IQ. I can't imagine what a native 1200mm lens comparable to Canon's current-day IQ would be like. And, you'ed get 1680mm out of it with a 1.4x TC!

If they can ever get those diffractive optics to start delivering, you might actually be able carry it. Hopefully with some 6 or 8 stop IS. At 1200mm you'll need it!

This is really starting to get ridiculous, who needs a 1200 mm equivalent in a body that's impossible to hold still??

Superzoom compacts have moved away from usefulness to marketing gimmick IMHO.

Got one here to complement 5D3 and 60D. As Mt Spokane says, not very ergonomic but light, inconspicuous, pure fun. I use it 95% of the time at 1200mm handheld.

My girlfriend has a Panasonic Lumix FZ-50 which has a 12x zoom and 35 - 420 mm equivalent and is f/2.8 - f/3.7. It takes fabulous pictures given enough light, but so far the 420mm equivalent has been enough reach. What's lacking in this case is more wide angle, something that she's missing a lot. So we're actually looking at something new.

The FZ-200 looks great, 'only' 24x optical zoom (25-600mm equivalent) but it is full range F2.8!!! What's missing is the manual controls of the lens that the FZ-50 has. That really was/is a special superzoom camera.

I set up a discussion in the SX50 thread about how good it is. I routinely throw the SX50 into my briefcase when I travel to a conference and might have an hour or two off to photo birds. Here is a 100% crop of a heron with fish at 1200mm hand held that I took in Lisbon last week (RAW). I would not have done better with a 5DIII and a 100-400mm L. These 50x zooms are not toys but very powerful complements to heavy gear.

I like how they describe it as a cannon. It's not, although for those used to the prosumer market it seems like it. They should see a 600mm, or even one of those rare 1200mm lenses =D

I'd be curious to see what a modern-day EF 1200mm f/5.6 L IS II lens looked like, and what kind of IQ it provided. I suspect it might barely border on "hand holdable" (i.e. like the old 600mm f/4 L) if it used todays fluorite elements and titanium/magalloy body. The 600mm f/4 L IS II with a 2x TC still offers STUNNING IQ. I can't imagine what a native 1200mm lens comparable to Canon's current-day IQ would be like. And, you'ed get 1680mm out of it with a 1.4x TC!

If they can ever get those diffractive optics to start delivering, you might actually be able carry it. Hopefully with some 6 or 8 stop IS. At 1200mm you'll need it!

Good idea. But wouldn't a modern 1200mm lens cost over $20k, given Canon's cost structure for superteles? Maybe not, since it's a little more limited in its usefulness due to the narrow field of view...not many sports pros would use it.

I set up a discussion in the SX50 thread about how good it is. I routinely throw the SX50 into my briefcase when I travel to a conference and might have an hour or two off to photo birds. Here is a 100% crop of a heron with fish at 1200mm hand held that I took in Lisbon last week (RAW). I would not have done better with a 5DIII and a 100-400mm L. These 50x zooms are not toys but very powerful complements to heavy gear.

I like how they describe it as a cannon. It's not, although for those used to the prosumer market it seems like it. They should see a 600mm, or even one of those rare 1200mm lenses =D

I'd be curious to see what a modern-day EF 1200mm f/5.6 L IS II lens looked like, and what kind of IQ it provided. I suspect it might barely border on "hand holdable" (i.e. like the old 600mm f/4 L) if it used todays fluorite elements and titanium/magalloy body. The 600mm f/4 L IS II with a 2x TC still offers STUNNING IQ. I can't imagine what a native 1200mm lens comparable to Canon's current-day IQ would be like. And, you'ed get 1680mm out of it with a 1.4x TC!

If they can ever get those diffractive optics to start delivering, you might actually be able carry it. Hopefully with some 6 or 8 stop IS. At 1200mm you'll need it!

Good idea. But wouldn't a modern 1200mm lens cost over $20k, given Canon's cost structure for superteles? Maybe not, since it's a little more limited in its usefulness due to the narrow field of view...not many sports pros would use it.

I like how they describe it as a cannon. It's not, although for those used to the prosumer market it seems like it. They should see a 600mm, or even one of those rare 1200mm lenses =D

I'd be curious to see what a modern-day EF 1200mm f/5.6 L IS II lens looked like, and what kind of IQ it provided. I suspect it might barely border on "hand holdable" (i.e. like the old 600mm f/4 L) if it used todays fluorite elements and titanium/magalloy body. The 600mm f/4 L IS II with a 2x TC still offers STUNNING IQ. I can't imagine what a native 1200mm lens comparable to Canon's current-day IQ would be like. And, you'ed get 1680mm out of it with a 1.4x TC!

If they can ever get those diffractive optics to start delivering, you might actually be able carry it. Hopefully with some 6 or 8 stop IS. At 1200mm you'll need it!

Good idea. But wouldn't a modern 1200mm lens cost over $20k, given Canon's cost structure for superteles? Maybe not, since it's a little more limited in its usefulness due to the narrow field of view...not many sports pros would use it.

I believe the old 1200 lens sold for over $100,000.00.

Which makes a $20k price tag, especially for a hand-holdable 1200mm DO, rather appealing!

I like how they describe it as a cannon. It's not, although for those used to the prosumer market it seems like it. They should see a 600mm, or even one of those rare 1200mm lenses =D

I'd be curious to see what a modern-day EF 1200mm f/5.6 L IS II lens looked like, and what kind of IQ it provided. I suspect it might barely border on "hand holdable" (i.e. like the old 600mm f/4 L) if it used todays fluorite elements and titanium/magalloy body. The 600mm f/4 L IS II with a 2x TC still offers STUNNING IQ. I can't imagine what a native 1200mm lens comparable to Canon's current-day IQ would be like. And, you'ed get 1680mm out of it with a 1.4x TC!

If they can ever get those diffractive optics to start delivering, you might actually be able carry it. Hopefully with some 6 or 8 stop IS. At 1200mm you'll need it!

Good idea. But wouldn't a modern 1200mm lens cost over $20k, given Canon's cost structure for superteles? Maybe not, since it's a little more limited in its usefulness due to the narrow field of view...not many sports pros would use it.

I believe the old 1200 lens sold for over $100,000.00.

Which makes a $20k price tag, especially for a hand-holdable 1200mm DO, rather appealing!

True, but only if you're willing to spring for $20,000 for the lens. I doubt you would. I know the older 1200mm sold for a lot, or rather does sell for a lot on the used market...as do other exotic lenses. I wouldn't pay a dime for it, though. Too heavy, no stabilization, not all that sharp other than in the center.

I set up a discussion in the SX50 thread about how good it is. I routinely throw the SX50 into my briefcase when I travel to a conference and might have an hour or two off to photo birds. Here is a 100% crop of a heron with fish at 1200mm hand held that I took in Lisbon last week (RAW). I would not have done better with a 5DIII and a 100-400mm L. These 50x zooms are not toys but very powerful complements to heavy gear.

I like how they describe it as a cannon. It's not, although for those used to the prosumer market it seems like it. They should see a 600mm, or even one of those rare 1200mm lenses =D

I'd be curious to see what a modern-day EF 1200mm f/5.6 L IS II lens looked like, and what kind of IQ it provided. I suspect it might barely border on "hand holdable" (i.e. like the old 600mm f/4 L) if it used todays fluorite elements and titanium/magalloy body. The 600mm f/4 L IS II with a 2x TC still offers STUNNING IQ. I can't imagine what a native 1200mm lens comparable to Canon's current-day IQ would be like. And, you'ed get 1680mm out of it with a 1.4x TC!

If they can ever get those diffractive optics to start delivering, you might actually be able carry it. Hopefully with some 6 or 8 stop IS. At 1200mm you'll need it!

Good idea. But wouldn't a modern 1200mm lens cost over $20k, given Canon's cost structure for superteles? Maybe not, since it's a little more limited in its usefulness due to the narrow field of view...not many sports pros would use it.

I believe the old 1200 lens sold for over $100,000.00.

Which makes a $20k price tag, especially for a hand-holdable 1200mm DO, rather appealing!

True, but only if you're willing to spring for $20,000 for the lens. I doubt you would. I know the older 1200mm sold for a lot, or rather does sell for a lot on the used market...as do other exotic lenses. I wouldn't pay a dime for it, though. Too heavy, no stabilization, not all that sharp other than in the center.

You doubt I would? Hmm...I just dropped $11,000 on the EF 600mm f/4 L IS II. A purchase I am quite happy with, and one I think was WELL worth the money. BTW, if you need proof of that:

I also plan to order a 2x TC III to go with it, which would make it a 1200mm lens when attached to a 5D III. If someone made a 1200mm DO IS with a light weight barrel for $20k, I'd be more than willing (hell, partical dispersion diffractive optics would be even better than fluorite...allowing an extremely short lens design, if Canon can ever figure it out). I'd be rather ecstatic if it was truly hand-holdable as well. I hand-hold the 600mm+1.4x, and it is hand-holdable, but not particularly ideal (too long, really.)

I also plan to order a 2x TC III to go with it, which would make it a 1200mm lens when attached to a 5D III. If someone made a 1200mm DO IS with a light weight barrel for $20k, I'd be more than willing (hell, partical dispersion diffractive optics would be even better than fluorite...allowing an extremely short lens design, if Canon can ever figure it out). I'd be rather ecstatic if it was truly hand-holdable as well. I hand-hold the 600mm+1.4x, and it is hand-holdable, but not particularly ideal (too long, really.)

This is really starting to get ridiculous, who needs a 1200 mm equivalent in a body that's impossible to hold still??

Superzoom compacts have moved away from usefulness to marketing gimmick IMHO.

Got one here to complement 5D3 and 60D. As Mt Spokane says, not very ergonomic but light, inconspicuous, pure fun. I use it 95% of the time at 1200mm handheld.

My girlfriend has a Panasonic Lumix FZ-50 which has a 12x zoom and 35 - 420 mm equivalent and is f/2.8 - f/3.7. It takes fabulous pictures given enough light, but so far the 420mm equivalent has been enough reach. What's lacking in this case is more wide angle, something that she's missing a lot. So we're actually looking at something new.

The FZ-200 looks great, 'only' 24x optical zoom (25-600mm equivalent) but it is full range F2.8!!! What's missing is the manual controls of the lens that the FZ-50 has. That really was/is a special superzoom camera.

I have an FZ-50 too and I love it- if it wasn't so noisy I'd probably still be using it more regularly. It's got better ergonomics than entry level DSLR's. Although the LCD seems so TINY now.

I know there's probably physics involved blah-dee-blah but I really can't fathom why there isn't even a 1/1.7" birdge/superzoom (or even better, something like Nikon 1 series). Once you get past the miniaturization constraint of most point and shoots, it seems like there would be a way to get something reasonably sized.